Am Sonntag, 19. Februar 2006 13:30 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes: > I'll try to explain why am am just not releasing 1.4.0 right away: I > continue to see small dribble of work that obviously some people deem > very important for a release.
I believe that this is a big misunderstanding: People do this and that because it is unclear when a release will happen and what should be contained. My impression is that 1.4.0 is "mentally released" and developers are developing for 1.4.1 (and later) really. > So perhaps going the active route is the approach. Yes. > Developer, if you have _anyting_ that you feel _must_ be included in > 1.4.0, the time is to state so now, loud and clear. John targetted some bugs to 1.4.0 recently. Of these, I would like to see the following in 1.4.0: 2251 (well understood and tested) 1161 (because this is a UI change that is best done in a major release) Given the recent interest in lyx-users we should also think about 2238. The most important problem of this bug is that it can lead to dataloss, even without a single error message on the console. The patch I created is low risk, because it a) restores what we have in 1.3, b) works well for me, and c) the interface to LyX is restricted to the well known mechanism in math_factory.C and math_parser.C, so if it has still problems they will only occur for documents that contain \xymatrix. It is certainly better to risk some unknown problems with \xymatrix than knowing that LyX will throw away parts of \xymatrix for sure. There are of course other problems, but IMHO they are not worth it to delay a release and/or not well enough understood (e.g. bug 2218) Finally I think that we should state in the announcement that 1.4.0, although usable in general, still has some rough edges (e.g. speed, the spell checker problem 2218). And the change tracking should be advertised as experimental. Georg
